Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34258833›Full record

Trial reportHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2021

Barriers and facilitators of shared decision making in acutely ill inpatients with schizophrenia-Qualitative findings from the intervention group of a randomised-controlled trial.

Stefanie Becher, Fabian Holzhüter, Stephan Heres, Johannes Hamann

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Stefanie BecherKlinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Fabian HolzhüterKlinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Stephan HeresIsar-Amper-Klinikum München Nord, Munich, Germany.
Johannes HamannKlinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3861-6017
Klinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie · DEIsar-Amper-Klinikum München-Ost · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundShared decision making (SDM) is appreciated as a promising model of communication between clinicians and patients. However, in acute mental health settings, its implementation is still unsatisfactory.

objectiveThe aim of this study is to examine barriers and facilitators of SDM with acutely ill inpatients with schizophrenia.

designA qualitative interview study was performed. SETTING AND

participantsThe analysis is based on interviews with participants (patients and staff members) of the intervention group of the randomised-controlled SDM MAIN VARIABLES STUDIED: Interviews addressed treatment decisions made during the current inpatient stay. The interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis.

resultsA total of 40 interviews were analysed and 131 treatment decisions were identified. According to the interviewees, SDM had taken place in 29% of the decisions, whereas 59% of the decisions were made without SDM. In 16%, a clear judgement could not be made. Barriers and facilitators of SDM were categorised into patient factors, clinician factors, setting factors and others. Clinicians mostly reported patient factors (e.g., symptoms) as barriers towards SDM, which were not mirrored on the patients' side. Facilitators included patient as well as clinician behaviour during consultations.

conclusionEven in the context of a successful SDM intervention, the implementation of SDM for patients in the very acute stages of schizophrenia is often not possible. However, strong facilitators for SDM have also been identified, which should be used for further implementation of SDM. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: During the development of the study protocol, meetings with user representatives were held.

Indexed as

InpatientsSchizophreniaDecision MakingDecision Making, SharedHumansPatient Participationhealth services researchpatient autonomyschizophreniashared decision making

Identifiers

PMID34258833
PMCPMC8483208
OpenAlexW3181555036

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.